r/SneerClub archives
newest
bestest
longest
The Motte: "We Oppose Identity Politics" Also The Motte: "Peoples of Color, REEEEEEEEE" (https://i.redd.it/cbqqam9maez21.png)
29

That last comment is so long-winded it’s borderline nonsensical. Good god. So much breath wasted on essentially saying “you’re wrong, shithead.” Why do they feel the need to drown opinions in tedious pseudoscientific appeals to objectivity?

The second comment is arguably the most ridiculous: that's a ridiculously unparsimonious test. The last one is just bad writing which reflects something roughly accurate.

“making the superstructure too obvious”! honestly i am delighted by this - doing their best to pretend to understand simple marxist theory, it’s like watching a baby taking his first steps. you’ll get it next time!

– oh shit wait i just made fun of nonsensical misuse of jargon! EXPOSED as acting in bad faith by the expert manipulations of the motte!

So that first comment - that’s literally just “I watched Ben Shapiro throw a tantrum and I want someone to help me find a framework under which he’s totally reasonable”, right?

[I should’ve waited a bit, could’ve included this in the main image!] (https://old.reddit.com/r/TheMotte/comments/bqrb5q/culture_war_roundup_for_the_week_of_may_20_2019/eo8ywx8/?context=4)

"people who aren't racist on a visceral level are psychologically damaged" ok dr. peterson
Apparently standpoint epistemology is perfectly fine when it justifies their racism.
> It's triggering deeply rooted group preservation instincts. You can't turn it off without harming some aspect of the self. Wooooooowwww Apparently I'd understand if I was white (oh wait)
Lmao what kind of coke-bottle ideological glasses do you have to be wearing to read that comic as “skewering white people” and to couch your discomfort in lazy evopsych about tribal behavior? (Well, probably the same glasses that distort interracial relationships into some form of genocide)

When I want more confidence than “I know it when I see it”, I test the hypothesis by leaving openings in my arguments that I would expect someone to exploit only if they were more interested in winning than in conversing. For example, typos, phrases that sound silly, analogies that someone could pretend to find offensive, confessions of ignorance in certain domains.

Another indicator is whether a position is opposed at every possible point of disagreement. If the other person vacillates from argument to argument and does not consistently stand by a few key disagreements, bias may be involved.

It’s a good thing that people are predictable automatons. Heavens forbid, I might actually have to introspect on a deeper level otherwise.

Look, you might think that my arguments are dumb and bad just like my shitty opinions, but actually I'm playing nine dimensional chess and if you point out how shitty I am at debating that just proves that you're wrong qed
Speak for yourself, my insensere, disingenuous and manipulative manner of engaging with people to extract information is pure brilliance.

Is there even context for the third comment?

[This appears to what offended the linked commentator's delicate sensibilities] (https://imgur.com/gallery/BqPzT)
Imagine getting mad at a cute comic making this mild and non-controversial point.

We’ve been relatively doing well on not making this “ShitTheMotteSays” or for that matter “Shit TheMotte Says which I read because I still participate in TheMotte and I don’t have the self respect to have been permanently banned from there for trolling”

Let’s try to keep it that way

Hey tbf I *did* get permabanned a few days ago But alright, I see your point.
Congratulations!

Please don’t repeat that “reee” meme it was created by the alt-right to describe “autistic screeching”

Huh. I'd always figured it was supposed to represent toad noises.

Identity politics is when non-white people exist.

Why can’t they just ignore their identity? You know, like white people.